Labels

Wednesday, 28 January 2015

Have We All Been Subject To Buddhist Propaganda?

After
working through a succession of unsuccessful ideas for my blog post this month,
I was texted by a friend: ‘Why don’t you investigate violence in Buddhism?’

This
message surprised me. I’m no expert, but having studied Buddhism and read a
book written by the Dalai Lama, I felt I could reasonably say that Buddhism =
Peace.

Typing
very bluntly ‘Violence in Buddhism’ into Google, I came across a few articles
that shocked me. One example was from 2012, a claim that Buddhists had been
oppressing Muslims in Burma,
repeatedly trying to block humanitarian aid. The article was accusing these Buddhist monks
of fuelling ethnic tensions in the country. For me this was particularly
resonant after the very recent attacks in France, having raised questions
about religious violence worldwide.

And it
made me think: these incidents of Buddhist violence seem to have slipped past
unnoticed in the West (judging by my reaction of surprise and horror).

And, even
more importantly, I found an act of violence that took place in Japan by the
terrorist group Aum Shinrikyo to have been founded upon Buddhist ideas and
scriptures. The Buddhist rationalisation of
taking the lives of "less spiritually advanced" beings in order to
advance them towards salvation seemed horrifying, as my aforementioned
perceptions of Buddhist morals were shattered. Reading on, I was pleased to see
that these incidents were few and far between, and many Buddhists would be
doubtful that this terrorism could be even labeled as an offshoot of their
religion.

However, my innocence had been tainted. Was this
ideal religion, the one I had so brazenly claimed ‘had never caused any war’
not what it seemed? I found some explanation in the blogging of Professor Michael Jerryson, author of the book ‘Buddhist Warfare’ (eight
essays that consider Buddhist violence and how, throughout history, their philosophy
has justified this). Professor Jerryson claimed that Thai monks, subject to living
in constant fear and violence during the South Thailand insurgency, had resorted to
carrying guns. This was for survival and, to a Westerner such as Professor
Jerryson, it seemed to reject their peacemaking ideals.

And this is where I
suggest we have been holding a romantic view of Buddhism. We are held in a Western ignorance of Buddhist history; Buddhist tradition is just as familiar
with violence as the three Abrahamic faiths of Christianity, Judaism and Islam: for example, the long history of feuds between Buddhists in Japan, the Tibetan monastic assassination in 841 of King Langdarma, supposedly justified although the early
texts condemn the mental states that lead to violent behavior. However, within these
texts it is also possible to find examples of Buddha killing Hindu people for insulting
a Buddhist sutra. As Professor Paul Demieville recounts, ‘We are told
that the first reason [to put the Brahmins to death] was out of pity [for
them], to help the Brahmins avoid the punishment they had accrued by committing
evil deeds while continuously slandering Buddhism.’ ‘Compassionate Killing’ is something deemed
acceptable, even honorable, in this instance. Within these scriptures, it has
been noted that killing an ant causes you bad karma, but murdering an infidel
who ‘has only emptiness’ has no more karmic return than ‘destroying the wind’.

Since the 1900s, Buddhism has become
increasingly popular in the West, initially sparked by the influx of Chinese
missionaries in the United
States. It became a popular escape from the
perceived complexity of Western life by the Hippie generation of the 1970s.

I’m not saying that the first missionaries
intentionally deceived us, but somewhere along the way we have forgotten that
Buddhists too, are human; which, sadly, as history has shown, seems to include a
tendency to engage in violence. I think maybe the inaccessibility of the
Buddhist scriptures has played a part in our ignorance. At least, they aren’t
readily available at the click of a button over the internet.

To call it propaganda is possibly too accusatory;
I am simply trying to shed the belief that Buddhism rises above other religions
by refusing to engage in violence. And I can say it no better than this writer:

"No major world religion
is vastly different from the other when it comes to its propensity to inspire
violence. Instead of using
religious violence to demonize particular faiths we should hold in our hearts a
continuous candlelight vigil to end inter-religious violence–holding hands with
Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus–and start seeing each other as
fellow human beings."